Sydney-based Indian to make movie on witch hunt

Witch hunt, the dark underside of India’s development thesis, will be captured on celluloid by Sydney-based director-cinematographer Simon Kurian.

(In the photo: Ismail Merchant ( standing), Simon Kurian (sitting), Madhur Jaffery (sitting) and in the background (standing) looking on is the Producer Richard Hawley.)

Set in contemporary India, the movie examines the widespread practice wherein women are abused, persecuted, exiled or killed. In mainly superstitious tribal societies of north India, witches are blamed for drought, floods, a stroke of bad luck, or ill-health. But some sociologists say the superstition is only a convenient excuse to harass women.

“The Witch Hunt is a dark and dramatic tale, of the unequal battles that are often fought in the Indian landscape unnoticed by most and ignored by many,” says Simon Kurian who has co-written the script with his wife Geethanjali.

“The story is based on true events, which Simon researched and developed over 10 years, after travelling to northern India and at one point living for several weeks with the tribals who are trapped in this practice,” says Geethanjali. “Over the years we have continued to follow the stories. A decade has passed, but our story remains as tragically relevant as it did when Simon first began researching the subject. Simon and I wrote the screenplay based on the diary he had written during his research.”

The film will be released internationally with part of the proceeds going towards the rehabilitation of women who have been victims of witch hunts. “For us this is not just a feature film, it is a cause to which we are deeply committed and we hope through the film to bring it to light and force people to sit up and take notice and do something concrete and sustainable to support the victims and also to stamp out the practice once and for all,” says Geethanjali.

The film was originally to be produced by Ismail Merchant and will now be dedicated to his memory. Merchant died in 2005. “It was Ismail and James Ivory to whom I first gave the screenplay to read. They both loved the script and Ismail asked me in 2003 whether he could produce it. He remained deeply committed to the project ever since he read it,” says Kurian

With a cast of prominent Indian and western actors, the key crew for the bilingual (English- Hindi) film will be drawn from Europe, and India and it will be post-produced in Sydney. “Casting will commence in India shortly,” said Kurian. “This is a film that requires committed performances from actors who can understand the cause behind the story and elevate the roles with the empathy that can convey a harsh issue in an uncompromising and real way.”

Simon has been associated with Merchant Ivory ever since he assisted Ismail on his film ‘Cotton Mary’ which was filmed on location in Kochi; they went on to become close friends. Simon, who is originally from Kerala, has been making films for international television since eighties; his credits include films for BBC Television and Channel 4 UK.

(Published in Sunday Times of India, Bangalore on May 27, 2007)

Are expletives okay?

Apparently British TV shows are so full of them that David Munk, deputy foreign editor of Guardian, wonders whether we are overdosing on expletives.

"In context it sounds natural - almost needed," he says. "But the way it seems to be thrown into casual conversations about anything from courgettes to croquet seems to me a bit odd. But then again maybe I'm getting old; or maybe our TV shows have been too old for too long. Maybe it's just television catching up with the society it is supposed to reflect..."

"... Our language has moved on. Words that once shocked and surprised have become standard expressions.... Try expressing your surprise/joy/anger using other imaginative descriptions.
There could then come a time when the word will once again regain its power to shock," he suggests.

The other day, I heard a 8-year old boy in my apartment complex say, "I don't like Shakira's a**." I was initially startled, but then I wondered: Why be so surprised and shocked? Times have changed, haven't they.

As David Munk says, what used to shock us, no longer do.

Manmohan springs a surprise

Don't pay huge salaries to CEOs, that was Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's advice to corporates at a meeting of CII in New Delhi yesterday. (See below link to the full text of the PM's speech.) This was the fourth point in the 10-point social charter that he suggested to the Indian corporates which are riding the crest of an economic boom.

This seemingly Leftist turn by the architect of India's capitalist revolution is a surprise, and what led him to formulate this charter will be a topic of specution for long. Was it politics, social concern or worries about a malfunctioning economy?

Let us go to the speech where he spoke of the fat salaries that corporates pay:

"Four, resist excessive remuneration to promoters and senior executives and discourage conspicuous consumption. In a country with extreme poverty, industry needs to be moderate in the emoluments levels it adopts. Rising income and wealth inequalities, if not matched by a corresponding rise of incomes across the nation, can lead to social unrest. The electronic media carries the lifestyles of the rich and famous into every village and every slum. Media often highlights the vulgar display of their wealth. An area of great concern is the level of ostentatious expenditure on weddings and other family events. Such vulgarity insults the poverty of the less privileged, it is socially wasteful and it plants seeds of resentment in the minds of the have-nots."

Though an element of truth in what he said can't be ruled out, the ills he referred to are nothing but inevitable realities of the near-capitalist society that we live in. The earlier socialist governance model did address some of these points, but the way it collapsed makes us only ponder over any available alternatives.

Manmohan Singh was the one who in early 1990s dismantled the bleeding socialist economy and replaced it with free but regulated market economy. Quite rightly he himself has now done a reality check as to where the new economic model has taken us. The speech is an indication that the economic growth that India has been trumpting is largely confined to cities.

Forget villages, look at the underbelly of our premier cities. Small islands of luxury are surrounded by nothing but misery and deprivation. The infrastructure for basic necessities -- water, power, housing, health, medical facilities, education and transportation -- is in a shambles inspite of the booming economy.

How much has the goodness percolated down? If it hasn't why?

It's commonly believed people have lots of money. Though disputed, some economists say, even the poorest is now less poorer. Let us assume it is true. But then, where are these people spending their money? Has the system enabled them only to get more consumerist? Do we have enough other avenues where money can be more wisely invested?

A society cannot rest merely on glittering malls; Only knowledge and intellectual wealth can provide a solid foundation. Many developed nations, especially the US, has been able to achieve it. That's the reason why the US attracts even people who are opposed to it.

The current boom which the corporates exempify is only one side of the story. Manmohan Singh's speech points to the other incomplete side of Indian economy. The charter will have more cerdibility only if Manmohan Singh succeeds in convincing his colleagues in politics and bureaucracy on the need to let go the unmonitored government control on key infrastructure areas, and allow increased partnership with enterprising invidividuals, and private institutions.

The poor and middle class depend on the government. As long as our government institutions are synonymous with inefficiency and corruption, what hope the real India will have?

Link:

-- Full text of Manmohan Singh's speech